So what word could be used instead? Personally, I've always just called my bottom unmentionables "underwear." My sister, though, disagrees. "Underwear" is no dice, she says, because women have two types of underwear (bras and panties)—and how will you know which ones are being referred to?

Another friend of mine has suggested the terms "top undies" and "bottom undies," but I don't see that particular strategy catching on, either....

It's well-documented that women are ahead of the curve when it comes to linguistic ingenuity....

I don't think "panty" is a proper singular. One of the item is "panties". I don't wear a suit with a "pant", but "pants".

So also with "underpants".

And by the way, speaking as a straight guy (but, granted, of a certain age), I urge against the commando approach. I don't want to see that region in public. I wish Ann Hathaway had followed my advice.

LOL. The author thinks the sexualization of panties was started by some marketing department somewhere. What a tool. Panties are sexy because young women wear them. Grandma underwear is not sexy because grandmas wear them.

Clearly we need to organize a commission of modern feminists funded by government to come up with a non sex specific term that is somehow both sexy and not sexy, masculine yet feminine, respectful and yet edgy. Fig leaf?

And 'panties" is good also--else how could college students go on a "panty-raid?" (LOL, I'm really dating myself now--NO ONE has separate dorms any more. Hell, in my day @LSU the girls dorms were on one end of the campus and the men's at the far opposite. I know, I know...slowly fossilizaing..)

I'd like to say 'knickers' because that is a fun word, but it's poseur-y coming from an American.

Short for knickerbockers. Given the word's use in NY State, nothing poseur-ish about it at all.

Feel free to use it.

Nomennovum said...

LOL. The author thinks the sexualization of panties was started by some marketing department somewhere. What a tool. Panties are sexy because young women wear them. Grandma underwear is not sexy because grandmas wear them.

The Ironclad Rule of Sex in the Animal Kingdom:

* With females, young equals sexy. Old, not so much.

Depends on the woman.

There are a lot of younger women that are about as appealing as a pile of dirty laundry.

There is a fair number of older women that have class, style, elegance, and real beauty.

The plural for pants, scissors, and so forth comes from being of the class of things made from two of the same thing, counting a mirror image as the same. Pair of Xs.

The pair construction doesn't work for panties, which are joined front back than left right.

This is incorrect. Panties is correct by analogy to knickers, breeches, trousers, etc. All of those garments have a plane of symmetry which coincides with the median plane rather than the frontal plane as rh asserted. See this anatomical drawing for reference: link. Some pairs of panties (in fact most) may be physically sewn together front to back but I have ahem scene some which are seamed down the median line--at least in front.

A curious exception is the word pantyhose which one never hears in the plural. The portmanteau word is based on "hose" which is an old Germanic term with obvious metaphorical history. But even the Germans seem to use Hose and Hosen (pl) interchangeably.

Well, I yearn for the day when I can live like my patron saint, Al Gore. Saint Al renounced all worldly goods like clothing, electricity and sanitation to live as would a feral animal in a cave, true to the scientific commandments.

Forget carbon neutral, I heard he wanted to go carbon ZERO.

I just want to be a better person, and when I watched the old non-OPEC controlled Current TV, that's what Aloysius gave me.

There is also undershorts, which for a female might be 'undies'.When I was growing up 'underwear' referred strictly to briefs/boxers and now also boxer-briefs.T-shirts were just t-shirts and were never called underwear.

Barge, if that's her she looks like a nice piece, seeming both pleasant and eminently fuckable, but someone has to teach her that the proper condiment for hot dogs is mustard, not ketchup.

I guess it doesn't matter if she's a lesbian, though that would be a waste. As with Ellsworth Toohey in The Fountainhead, my guess is she wrote the whole piece of twaddle solely in order to slip in the bit about linguistics, i.e. that women eat pussy better than men. Shoutout to dykesville, or then again it could be simple misandry.

The article is really not important. What is important is that she puts ketchup on hot dogs. Like ordering pastrami on white with mayo. It's just not done, girl! Even a lesbian is entitled to eat properly.

And when they take polls about "should women serve in the infantry", she not only thinks she has the brain to have an opinion, but she probably thinks she could handle it if it weren't so beneath her. Seriously, you womenfolks think too much about stupid things.